Re: Part 2 of 2 -- Re: GDP: NR 1.1 Pitches 2008-01-26 [OT]

[Graham Percival]

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 09:42:55 -0600
Stan Sanderson <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Feb 4, 2008, at 9:19 AM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> 
> >> I bet that there's less than a hundred people
> >
> > You mean "I bet there are fewer than..."  ;-)

*hmph*
In modern Canadian, an apostrophe followed by an `s' is
appropriate for singular or plural use.
:)

> > That is to say, content presented with bad grammar is less easy/ 
> > interesting/enjoyable to read than the same content written  
> > "correctly" -- and the content is therefore less effective at  
> > accomplishing its main purpose, which is communication.

Look, are we talking "horrible monstrocity, such that are,
commonly wrote, by non-English native speaker", or a minor word
choice?

I mean, does this sentence _actually_ bother anybody?  Or make it
unclear?
----
Accidentals are only printed on tied notes which begin a new
system:
----

I personally think that "which" makes the sentence flow better --
that's why I changed it from the "that" which was originally put
there by Valentin (IIRC).  When Kurt complained, I changed it back
to "that", but I still think which there's nothing wrong with
"which" in that sentence.  [sic :P ]


> Might not the same arguments be applied to the benefits of knowing  
> Lilypond's "grammar?"

Sure!  I am willing to go on record in stating that a native
LilyPond writer, who has been reading and creating lilypond code
every day for over twenty years, will have no need to know the
formal rules of LilyPond grammar.

Cheers,
- Graham